Open Setup Certification Group

[Korts]

I'm willing to volunteer.

[Korts]

I'd propose as long as two "certified" players have signed off on it, and no unanswered questions exist, it's good to go.

Win conditions
Role resolution
Special rules should all be spelled out

This I support.

[Korts]

You guys should have a member of your group willing to be devils advocate. basically its their job to break, abuse, or find flaws on purpose as much as possible in any setup so that these ideas are found and stopped before a setup is run.

If JDodge could be drawn into this this would be the perfect role for him.

or what shaft.ed said.

[Korts]

As a starting point I suggest we review the following setups:

Two of Four (a7/b7/a9/b9?)
Vengeful (does it need a review at all?)
Crush
Friends and Enemies (and Enemies (and That Other Guy))
Carbon-14
Variations on C9?

These are all based on fairly simple concepts. I'll post my thoughts on each setup/variations when I get home or tomorrow.

Eventually we should probably review all the open setups that have been played, starting with the list in mith's post 43 and Adel's 76-77.

[Korts]

Members of the group should now have mod rights in this thread and the sticky. Test by editing this post, please.

Seems I can't yet.

[Korts]

Would it be wise or feasible for us to get together on AIM to discuss this?

Tuesday or Wednesday.

I'm fine with either, you guys? Korts is also a consideration, timezone being an element.

I could stay up late Wednesday, depending on what time approximately you intend to be up. I can be until 2-3 AM GMT+1 (8-9 PM East Coast Time, 5-6 PM West Coast Time I think) tops.

[Korts]

If PM's and rulesets are going to be handed to the mods, I do not think that Open Games should be applicable for New Mod experience.

Running an Open Setup gives insight to balance and lets the New Mod gain experience in the technical aspects of modding--regular vote counts, prodding, replacement, night action resolution.

I support stock Role PMs with a seperate part for flavor, as well as a sample ruleset.

Borrowing Tarhalindur's format for Role PMs is a good idea.

Assassins in the Palace have been broken,

Really? How? Where?

I seem to recall something along the lines of post no relevant comments, wagon randomly, and the first person to get two or three votes is lynched because they more or less can't be king. This prevents the assassin from getting any clues regarding the king's identity while the town still can find the assassin.

Post 8 by armlx from the link that Yos posted explains it nicely:

Just so everyone knows how this works:

No discussion is optimal. Discussion strongly favors the uninformed group in a game, in this case the assassin.

If someone votes the king, do not vote that player automatically in response. Doing so is the best way to lose the game.

If at any point someone has more then 1 vote, they are to be policy lynched as they more or less can NOT be the king.

If no one has more then 1 vote, vote anyone you want, and I mean anyone. That includes the king.

Well... let's start by certifying some setups, and then we can work on role PMs if we run out of other things to do

I'm pretty sure we can safely certify C9 and vengeful without any major changes.

Which C9? Cop, Doc, Mafia RB is the regular one, right?

[Korts]

I don't really have any problems or questions with any of the unflagged setups.

[Korts]

I don't really have any problems or questions with any of the unflagged setups.

you sound like you may have some reservations though... do you have any?
like, are we skipping a step that you think is important?
do you want more time to think about it?

I seemed to remember some people somewhere raising their concerns about Lovers. I'm not sure, but it was maybe SensFan. However since I couldn't find the post in question and I myself don't have any problem with the setup I don't really have anything to argue.

I think ruleset control is even worse. The same ruleset doesn't work for every mod; one tends to evolve as the mod sees what works and what's superfluous/grates on the mod personally/doesn't get enough attention in standard rulesets. It's a more valuable learning experience than the PMs are. (Exceptions apply--like, 72-hour deadlines are an entirely different genre. I'd kinda like to see mafia daytalking become a regular variant in rulesets, but can understand the view that it's a role-based function and should be banned from opens unless otherwise specified.)

While I agree with the basis that each mod's ruleset should be their own, a sample ruleset should still be done even if purely as a reference of what are the important points and what may just be fluff. Also, I can easily see prospective mods being either too lazy or too... mentally hindered to make a proper ruleset.

And yes, I'd like to see Ether in the group as well.

Lovers Mafia: generally speaking open 97's Role PMs are the closest to standard (the others are written flavorfully) with the addition of explicitly allowed day talk and without the "pre-Day 1 talking allowed" clause since day talk makes this unnecessary.

Also, the Vanilla PM in 97 says "nightchoices" which IMO should be changed to "actions" since I understand Lovers is nightless.

This is what my Lovers PMs would look like:

Mafia Lover

You are a member of the mafia, and a lover with XXXX. If one of you is lynched, the other will commit suicide. The two of you may talk during the day. I have set up a private Quicktopic thread for you at:

You win when at least half of the living players are mafia.

Vanilla

You are a Townie. You have no actions. You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.

I haven't read the rulesets but I will later on. Gotta run now.

[Korts]

Am I alone in thinking that the relation between size and power of mafia groups is not linear?

I see 2:4 or even 2:5 as being much more balanced than 4:8 or 3:9.

It actually is linear in nightless. With nightkills, not so much.

I disagree. Increasing the size of the group allows for greater protection, culling of the weakest, bussing without crippling the group, etc. The tools of the mafia become more useful as they have more members to run through.

So do the tools of the town, though. More days means more useful information; more scum means more interconnection; plus it's much harder for the scum to just "run the tables" and win without losing any members, and once one scum gets lynched town has a lot more info to go on.

Well if we're talking realistic and not just EV, you might as well also take into account that with 50+ players the sheer amount of information serves as much to confuse as it does to help. I doubt I would ever want to be in that endgame; hell, even in a mini the amount of information generated makes it hard work to get any truly useful and accurate deductions.

I'd wager somewhere between 60 and 80 townies to balance a 10-man group of mafia, and that is just by feel.

[Korts]

I like Xyl's idea of a variable number of players with a set date for end of sign-ups. And three consecutive town wins doesn't seem conclusive evidence that the setup is inherently in the town's favour.

I'd break that down differently:

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-12 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:9)
13-16 players: 4 scum (4:9 to 4:12)

I'd go with this over Xyl's version.

[Korts]

An idea:

Since we have no solid data of either setup being more balanced than the other, we could have them run as variations of each other, in seperate sign-ups. After the first run we might be able to decide on the issue better.

EDIT: that's basically what shaft.ed said.

[Korts]

I'm leaning towards certifying trendy/subversive, although I seem to remember there were two versions of it when Thesp originally posted it. I'm going to dig it up if necessary, but the two versions looked like this:

V1

1 of Cop/Nurse
1 of Doc/Deputy

V2

1 of Cop/Doc
1 of Nurse/Deputy

The latter is better for town because they have a power role guaranteed.

Also,

certify Bird C9

[Korts]

V2 of trendy/subversive is better than V1 for another reason: there will never be a cop and a doc together, so the classic breaking strategy doesn't apply.

Regarding Bird C9 renaming, I suggest we turn to the Open Setup Discussion crowd. To me it doesn't particularly matter what the setup's name is, though.

[Korts]

Sorry, Norinel, I have no idea how I mixed you up with Thesp.

I think I like Macho Bird for a name, although I find myself kinda drunk yet again. Flay's suggestion of Bird 1111111 was pretty good too.

[Korts]

I'll more thoroughly consider Polygamist tomorrow, but Ether's argument seems convincing--it's just Lovers with every player being replaced with a lover pair, and I don't see why this is a better way to go than simply allowing hydras in Lovers sign-ups.

[Korts]

But Lovers Hydra=Polygamist. For the record I have no problem with Polygamist's balance, and based on that alone I'm for certifying it--but it's just a variant of Lovers.

[Korts]

I agree.

vote: kill

[Korts]

It is also not mafia, per se. Which is more than enough to disqualify it.

I'll need to consider 2:2:n later, I just woke up.

[Korts]

certify 2:2:9

Can a game where the scum is a single person and thus has no connections be called mafia? I'm not entirely convinced of that. Based on this I'm leaning no on 1:4.

[Korts]

Masons and Monks: no opinion at this point.

Friends and Enemies and Enemies: in this form, I think it hurts mafia, because if the masons claim they can't counterclaim (3-man masonship vs. 2-man scumteams). This was the reason for the Friends and Enemies and Enemies and that Other Guy fix (2-man masonship plus backup mason).

Quack Multiball: definitely not. Way too many night actions, and quacks kill, don't they? Half the town would get massacred Night 1.

Twofold Mafia: no opinion at this point.

[Korts]

I will put some work in tomorrow and say something about Masons and Monks and Twofold. I will also collect some setups to discuss from the old open setup discussion thread.

Meanwhile,

vote to kill Quack Multiball; vote to kill 1:4

EDIT: Also, mith, could you update the OP? I've already done the formatting and everything, just add these to the list of certified setups:

Vanilla Nightless

• * 6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
  * 9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
  * 12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

Bird 7P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 3 Townies
  * 1 Cop
  * Doctor
  Day Start

2:2:9

• * 2 Mafia A Goons
  * 2 Mafia B Goons
  * 9 Vanilla Townies
  Day Start

Also, Trendy and Subversive C9 V1, V2 and V3 haven't been decided on either way; kill or certify? (Both V1 and V3 have three votes for certification from shaft.ed and Gurgi.)

Trendy and Subversive C9 Variants

V1

1 of Cop/Nurse
1 of Doc/Deputy


V2

Cop/Deputy
Doc/Nurse


V3

1 of Cop/Doc
1 of Nurse/Deputy

I

vote to kill V2; vote to certify V1 and V3

, which makes 3/6 votes for certification.

EDIT2: Lovers Mafia also has a wiki article, please update OP to reflect that.

[Korts]

bump

[Korts]

Trendy and Subversive variants should be decided on.

[Korts]

Approved Setups

(as of 09-April-11)

C9
One of four variations, randomly chosen:

• * 1 Cop, 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 3 Townies;
  * 1 Cop, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 2 Mafia, 5 Townies

F11
It consists of four variations, chosen at random

• * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Doctor, 5 Townies.
  * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Doctor, 6 Townies.

Pie E7

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker (for balance reasons, the Roleblocker should also be able to nightkill even if the Goon is dead)
  * 1 Sane Cop
  * 1 Doctor
  * 3 Townies

Vengeful 5P

• * 1 Godfather
  * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 3 Vengeful townies
  Nightless

Lovers Mafia

• * 2 Mafia Lovers
  * 4 Townies
  Nightless

Near-Vanilla

• * 3 Mafia
  * 1 Doctor
  * 1 Jailkeeper
  * 8 Townies

Vanilla Nightless

• * 6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
  * 9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
  * 12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

Bird 7P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 3 Townies
  * 1 Cop
  * Doctor
  Day Start

2:2:9

• * 2 Mafia A Goons
  * 2 Mafia B Goons
  * 9 Vanilla Townies
  Day Start

Vanilla Nightless

• * 6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
  * 9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
  * 12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

Bird 7P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 3 Townies
  * 1 Cop
  * Doctor
  Day Start

2:2:9

• * 2 Mafia A Goons
  * 2 Mafia B Goons
  * 9 Vanilla Townies
  Day Start

Trendy and Subversive C9 V1

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Nurse
  * 1 Doctor or Deputy Cop
  * 3 Townies

Trendy and Subversive C9 V3

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Doctor
  * 1 Deputy Cop or Nurse
  * 3 Townies

[Korts]

I'm looking through the old open setup discussion thread for setups worth review; a setup that springs to mind as something that should be explored is Crush.

Crush

• * 1 Mafia Godfather (vengeful-style)
  * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Lyncher (informed of their target)
  * 4 Townies (one of whom is unknowingly the lyncher's target)
  Day Start

[Korts]

While I'm considering Friends and Enemies;

Anyhow I'm gonna post, if it's a repeat then sue me:

I have an idea for a setup spurred by discussion of lovers which is so simple/obvious I'm sure it's been used/discussed extensively before but I'm unsure how to search for previous setups. Anyhow, in case it hasn't:

True Love

Nightless

8 Players- 2 Mafia, 6 Townies

4 lover pairs.

It is known the configuration of lovers is:

1 townie-1 townie
1 townie-1 townie
1 townie-1 scum
1 townie-1 scum

Everyone is aware of who is paired with whom. Daytalking is allowed between both lovers and scum.

This has exactly 50% odds of being won by either town or scum. Sounds awesome to me.

nominate True Love for certification

[Korts]

Wheels: are the percentages independent?

Alternating: I actually would like to test this one in action, and it's not really that harsh on town, barring the fact that the cop as even has to survive until N2 to get an investigation in. I think if the cop was odd and the doc was even it'd be much more reasonable.

Jungle Republic is a bit confusing on first glance. I'll give it more thought later.

[Korts]

EBWOP:

certify 2:2:7 Friends and Enemies

[Korts]

I dislike alternating C9, and it isn't C9, it has no uncertainty about the set-up

Alternating 9P then. What are the actual problems with it? It gives town at least one investigation and one protection, without the cop-doc breakage, and I wouldn't consider town weak in this setup, either.

Jungle Rep seems okay, I'd

certify

.

I'd rather

kill wheels

because the bus driver resolution may be confusing for the first time mods who are in the open queue.

Regarding Friends and Enemies, we should consider the variations.

[Korts]

I propose the renaming of "Alternating C9" to "Alternating 9P"

as per Xyl's post.

Any more C9/F11 variations that don't follow the appropriate pattern should default to being named according to their player number.

certify Alternating 9P with Odd-Night Cop/Even-Night Doc

[Korts]

Sending mass prod.

guys, Alternating 9P with Odd-Night Cop and Even-Night Doc, yay or nay?

And after that, we need other setups to review.

[Korts]

I want consensus answers to the following questions:

1. Are we depending upon EV based analysis? Does EV trump experience and intuition?
2. What is the target range of acceptable win percentages for 1 scum faction vs town?

bump for relevance, since these are relevant questions and were only answered by Ether and mith.

1. EV should be secondary IMO. Experience and intuition trump EV.
2. anywhere between 35 and 65 percent is acceptable, but I prefer if EV-wise town is below fifty percent, since in practice towns tend to do better.

Regarding Friends and Enemies, we should consider the variations.

bump for relevance also.

[Korts]

Approved Setups

(as of 09-June-11)

C9
One of four variations, randomly chosen:

• * 1 Cop, 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 3 Townies;
  * 1 Cop, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 2 Mafia, 5 Townies

F11
It consists of four variations, chosen at random

• * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Doctor, 5 Townies.
  * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Doctor, 6 Townies.

Pie E7

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker (for balance reasons, the Roleblocker should also be able to nightkill even if the Goon is dead)
  * 1 Sane Cop
  * 1 Doctor
  * 3 Townies

Vengeful 5P

• * 1 Godfather
  * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 3 Vengeful townies
  Nightless

Lovers Mafia

• * 2 Mafia Lovers
  * 4 Townies
  Nightless

Near-Vanilla

• * 3 Mafia
  * 1 Doctor
  * 1 Jailkeeper
  * 8 Townies

Vanilla Nightless

• * 6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
  * 9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
  * 12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

Bird 7P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 3 Townies
  * 1 Cop
  * Doctor
  Day Start

2:2:9

• * 2 Mafia A Goons
  * 2 Mafia B Goons
  * 9 Vanilla Townies
  Day Start

Trendy and Subversive C9 V1

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Nurse
  * 1 Doctor or Deputy Cop
  * 3 Townies
  Day Start

Trendy and Subversive C9 V3

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Doctor
  * 1 Deputy Cop or Nurse
  * 3 Townies
  Day Start

Alternating 9P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 1 Even Night Cop
  * 1 Odd Night Doctor
  * 5 Townies
  Day Start

Jungle Republic

• * 1 Seer
  * 3 Mafia (no NK)
  * 2 Werewolves (has an NK)
  * 6 Townies
  Day Start

Friends and Enemies (2:2:7)

• *2 Mafia
  *2 Masons
  *7 Townies
  Day Start

[Korts]

Masons and Monks: 2 non-A masons and 2 non-B masons
Twofold Mafia: 1 Doc, 1 A-Cop, 1 B-Cop

Actually, have we discussed either of these?

Masons and Monks needs deeper analysis, but i think twofold will definitely go through, we just have to decide on an appropriate ratio.

[Korts]

From the past 10 pages of the Open Setup Discussion thread, these setups were nominated and seconded (big kudos to BridgesAndBalloons for combing through the thread):

1-shot C9 by Elephant Hell

1-shot C9

2 Mafiosi

1 from: 1-shot Cop (Sane), Townie (50% chance of each)
1 from: 1-shot Doc (Sane), Townie (50% chance of each)
3 Townies

Daystart.

I think this is a pretty good fix for the cop/doc pair's game breaking aspect. I think this game is balanced, and I don't see any breaking strategies--cop could claim as if the cop and doc had full abilities, but the cop will only get one result in. And the name is accurate, too, unusually for "C9" variations.

I vote to certify 1-shot C9

Cowardly Mafia by Elephant Hell

Cowardly Mafia

...Revenge of Cowardly Mafia

2 Bulletproof Mafiosi
1 Compulsive Vigilante
9 Townies

The Mafia has no nightkill but 2 shared abilities: Gunsmith (detects Compulsive Vigilante) and Bus Drive. Either Mafioso may use either ability. They gain a shared nightkill ability in the night after the Compulsive Vigilante dies.

This is a very interesting concept; basically a 2:10 mountainous with the town controlling the mafia kill. the vig also serves as a pseudo-investigative role, since if it hits mafia, the kill won't go through. It may be a bit harsh on scum, though, since the most pro-town players will always be kept alive as long as the vig is not dead.

[Korts]

sent massprod

[Korts]

SCIENCE

(7 players)
1 mafia goon
1 mafia encryptor
vs.
3 vanilla townies
2 daymasons
Day Start

Encryptor's survival permits mafia daytalking. (Of course, it doesn't matter which of them has that role.)

tentative

certify

Watcher Multiball

(18 players)
2 mafia goons
1 mafia watcher
vs.
2 werewolves
1 werewolf watcher
vs.
1 weak seer (dies if it targets a werewolf)
1 odd-night vigilante
1 even-night vigilante
9 vanilla townies

Day start. Scum are crosskill-immune, which is of course the only reason their kill might fail. Endgame priority for werewolves. (This extends to prisoner's dilemma--it activates as soon as it is impossible for the town to win, if there are an equal number of mafia and werewolves. I'm not wild about the weak seer; I wouldn't mind taking it out but giving werewolves priority anyway.)

Scigatt's asymmetrical version thing

(16 players)
1 mafia watcher
2 mafia goons
vs.
3 werewolves
vs.
1 seer
1 odd-night vigilante
1 even-night vigilante
7 vanilla townies

Werewolves are crosskill-immune.

Of the two above setups, I prefer Scigatt's, and the concept is pretty much the same.

Regarding SCIENCE: we discussed this with Ether over AIM, and while I think it's balanced, I'd like to see it in practice before I can conclusively say this or that; we should seriously do that marathon-style continuous run of open setups waiting to be certified that was mentioned ITT before. And if we do, it should have a proper queue structure and not just like marathon games. Perhaps even a seperate forum for them, since marathon games are freemarket, and these will require a proper queue structure.

[Korts]

Regarding Friends and Enemies, we should consider the variations.

bump for relevance also.

Masons and Monks: 2 non-A masons and 2 non-B masons
Twofold Mafia: 1 Doc, 1 A-Cop, 1 B-Cop

Actually, have we discussed either of these?

Masons and Monks needs deeper analysis, but i think twofold will definitely go through, we just have to decide on an appropriate ratio.

From the past 10 pages of the Open Setup Discussion thread, these setups were nominated and seconded (big kudos to BridgesAndBalloons for combing through the thread):

1-shot C9 by Elephant Hell

1-shot C9

2 Mafiosi

1 from: 1-shot Cop (Sane), Townie (50% chance of each)
1 from: 1-shot Doc (Sane), Townie (50% chance of each)
3 Townies

Daystart.

I think this is a pretty good fix for the cop/doc pair's game breaking aspect. I think this game is balanced, and I don't see any breaking strategies--cop could claim as if the cop and doc had full abilities, but the cop will only get one result in. And the name is accurate, too, unusually for "C9" variations.

I vote to certify 1-shot C9

Cowardly Mafia by Elephant Hell

Cowardly Mafia

...Revenge of Cowardly Mafia

2 Bulletproof Mafiosi
1 Compulsive Vigilante
9 Townies

The Mafia has no nightkill but 2 shared abilities: Gunsmith (detects Compulsive Vigilante) and Bus Drive. Either Mafioso may use either ability. They gain a shared nightkill ability in the night after the Compulsive Vigilante dies.

This is a very interesting concept; basically a 2:10 mountainous with the town controlling the mafia kill. the vig also serves as a pseudo-investigative role, since if it hits mafia, the kill won't go through. It may be a bit harsh on scum, though, since the most pro-town players will always be kept alive as long as the vig is not dead.

SCIENCE

(7 players)
1 mafia goon
1 mafia encryptor
vs.
3 vanilla townies
2 daymasons
Day Start

Encryptor's survival permits mafia daytalking. (Of course, it doesn't matter which of them has that role.)

tentative

certify

Watcher Multiball

(18 players)
2 mafia goons
1 mafia watcher
vs.
2 werewolves
1 werewolf watcher
vs.
1 weak seer (dies if it targets a werewolf)
1 odd-night vigilante
1 even-night vigilante
9 vanilla townies

Day start. Scum are crosskill-immune, which is of course the only reason their kill might fail. Endgame priority for werewolves. (This extends to prisoner's dilemma--it activates as soon as it is impossible for the town to win, if there are an equal number of mafia and werewolves. I'm not wild about the weak seer; I wouldn't mind taking it out but giving werewolves priority anyway.)

Scigatt's asymmetrical version thing

(16 players)
1 mafia watcher
2 mafia goons
vs.
3 werewolves
vs.
1 seer
1 odd-night vigilante
1 even-night vigilante
7 vanilla townies

Werewolves are crosskill-immune.

Of the two above setups, I prefer Scigatt's, and the concept is pretty much the same.

Regarding SCIENCE: we discussed this with Ether over AIM, and while I think it's balanced, I'd like to see it in practice before I can conclusively say this or that; we should seriously do that marathon-style continuous run of open setups waiting to be certified that was mentioned ITT before. And if we do, it should have a proper queue structure and not just like marathon games. Perhaps even a seperate forum for them, since marathon games are freemarket, and these will require a proper queue structure.

[Korts]

On second thought

un-certify 1-shot c9

certify Scigatt's asymmetrical game

(latter should probably get a new name though)

[Korts]

bump, will post some things here one of these days

[Korts]

bump for open queue related argument:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 10#1767010 and onto the next page

Can we all agree that splitting open game modding requirements into two seperate categories is silly and unnecessary when considering the purpose?

[Korts]

I'd rather stay out of it this time, this whole process was frustrating both in its lack of speed and in the mental energy required.